Paul, I am sorry, you were referring to my argument or to that of Bob W's?
Boris
On 5/30/2010 2:49 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
On May 30, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Bob W wrote:
Bob, with all due respect to you and Larry I understood him
rather differently. He indicated, to the best of my
understanding, that there are entirely different projects that
are more worthy of spending the money on. Therefore, as far I
understood his logic, this very project did not deserve real
attention. My opinion is pretty much opposite of his.
well frankly it doesn't deserve spending money on, unless
individual car owners choose to spend their own money on it.
It's the parents' responsibility to look after their own children,
not the responsibility of other people. If parents can't look after
their own children properly we already have methods for dealing
with it.
If you're worried about leaving your children in the back of the
car, go ahead and buy a warning device but don't expect me to pay
for it.
Of course your argument can be extended. You've already paid for the
airbags and seat bels in his car so that he'll be protected in case
he hits something. And you've paid for that buzzer that tells him his
lights are on, in case he forgets to shut them off. In fact, there
are numerous devices in cars, many of them mandated by regulation,
that we all pay for. But in the end we don't really pay in full.
Implementation of new technology creates jobs. Jobs generate revenue
that goes back to the population.
Bob
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from
the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the
directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
